MBB: Michigan Intercollegiate Athletic Association

[realist]

Olivet with a 6-5 record is really hard to understand.  Two of those wins are against the top conference teams.  I agree they have some solid talent, and you can't argue with the week in and week out performance of MM.  Any ideas why this team does not win more consistantly?

[Stinger]

While I would like to think that there is a plan in place that treats each of the players on each of the teams fairly and objectively I doubt it exists.  I doubt there is even a "gentlemans agreement" on the basic criteria.   I have watched these selections for too long a time now not to realize there have to be some "political correctness" and other non-performance type issues involved.  
Which stats are more heavily weighted?  Points scored, rebounds, blocked shots?  What happens to the obvious stat leader whose team loses?

Week one of this MIAA season Mantel and Joe P share the honors.

Mantel in games versus Hope and Olivet 34 points, and 21 rebounds.
Joe P. in games versus Alma and Adrian  31 points, and 22 rebounds.
M M  in games versus Albion and Calvin   31 points, and 22 rebounds.
Looks like MM did reasonably well compared to the guys that shared POW.

Week Two:

MM wins POW with 45 points and 23 rebounds versus Hope and Trine.
Joe P  Had 51 points and 23 rebounds. (Hope and Albion)  Better stats, but no cigar.

Week Five:

Bunn wins POW with 41 points, and 5 rebounds versus Alma and Olivet.
MM Had 52 points and 21 rebounds versus Hope and Calvin, and once again a guy with better stats (against tougher competion) is ignored.  

Can anyone explain how this supposedly well thought out "weights, and balances comparison of performances" thing really works?

I used only 3 weeks, and 4 total players to do my brief comparison.  What am I missing?

I imagine a  team's weekly record comes into play.  Olivet went 0-2 week one, while K and Calvin went 2-0.  That is probably why McClary didn't get it.  Week two K lost both and Olivet won both so McClary got the nod.   Joe P might have gotten it if K could have gone 1-1.  Last week Bunn was likely awarded POW   because Hope beat Olivet and went 2-0 for the week.  McClary had better overall  numbers but also took 47 shots to score his 51 points while Bunn shot 23 times to score his 41.  Maybe a consideration?  Chris Hutton from Albion would have been a well deserved POW last week.  They went 2-0 and his numbers were pretty comparable to Bunn.

[hoopdreams]

without going into much detail about last night's game at K-zoo, i came away very impressed (again) with how hard the Hornets played.  Some may say a little dirty at times, a little ugly at times but I like it.... a lot. They displayed a lot of heart.  Coach passage has a couple of young guys with A LOT of potential and with 2 or 3 more "players" to go with them will be an even tougher opponent in the future.

It was, in general, an ugly game to sit through -  fouls o plenty with many more that could/should have been called, nearly 70 ft's and 40 to's.  Thank you Nate King for your play at the end.  Maybe you'll get a chance to play real minutes someday, maybe....

[realist]

Quoting Mr Y:  "On the flip side, if you don't include whether or not the player's team won, you risk turning it into a 'selfish player's stat quest'."

Yeah, everyone one knows that selfish players never play on winning teams.   Also no coach of a winning team would ever leave his star on the floor just to pad the stats a wee bit!

[hoopdreams]

realist, I believe the answer to your question as to why they are not more consistant is the fact that with the exception of MM, they are terribly inconsistant.  Evans 27 one game, 4 the next, Jennings the same.  If Edsall isn't hitting his 3's, he's relatively useless (maybe a little excessive).  They haven't gone very deep of their bench in the games I've seen so they may tire too. Their defense isn't their calling card, so if they struggle at all offensively, they are in trouble.  Simply an observation.

[Adrian Hoops Fan]

I'm curious to know why--with 5 seconds left--Adrian thought it necessary to steal the ball from Tom Snikkers and score a layup at the final buzzer. Was the over/under for the game at 12?

I wasn't at the game so I don't know the full circumstances but in general I have no problem with a team, ahead or behind, playing the full 40 minutes.  I think it respects the opponent to play hard the entire game, and also instills the right mindset in the team, even if in certain situations it has no bearing on the outcome. 

It used to be played that way, but end-of-the-game etiquette has changed with advent of the shot clock. In today's game, once the shot clock is off and the outcome is decided, the winning team doesn't try to score and the losing team doesn't foul or play meaningful defense.

Really?? Now we are gonna start complaining that a team  played to the final buzzer.  Give me a break...if theat was Rodts, Mantel or any Kinight that would have been the greatest effort in the history of the MIAA. 

[ziggy]

I'm curious to know why--with 5 seconds left--Adrian thought it necessary to steal the ball from Tom Snikkers and score a layup at the final buzzer. Was the over/under for the game at 12?

I wasn't at the game so I don't know the full circumstances but in general I have no problem with a team, ahead or behind, playing the full 40 minutes.  I think it respects the opponent to play hard the entire game, and also instills the right mindset in the team, even if in certain situations it has no bearing on the outcome. 

It used to be played that way, but end-of-the-game etiquette has changed with advent of the shot clock. In today's game, once the shot clock is off and the outcome is decided, the winning team doesn't try to score and the losing team doesn't foul or play meaningful defense.

Really?? Now we are gonna start complaining that a team  played to the final buzzer.  Give me a break...if theat was Rodts, Mantel or any Kinight that would have been the greatest effort in the history of the MIAA. 

Actually I am pretty confident he would have been called out for it, by Calvin and non-Calvin fans alike. I certainly would have.

[Erm Schmigget]

I'm curious to know why--with 5 seconds left--Adrian thought it necessary to steal the ball from Tom Snikkers and score a layup at the final buzzer. Was the over/under for the game at 12?

I wasn't at the game so I don't know the full circumstances but in general I have no problem with a team, ahead or behind, playing the full 40 minutes.  I think it respects the opponent to play hard the entire game, and also instills the right mindset in the team, even if in certain situations it has no bearing on the outcome. 

It used to be played that way, but end-of-the-game etiquette has changed with advent of the shot clock. In today's game, once the shot clock is off and the outcome is decided, the winning team doesn't try to score and the losing team doesn't foul or play meaningful defense.

Really?? Now we are gonna start complaining that a team  played to the final buzzer.  Give me a break...if theat was Rodts, Mantel or any Kinight that would have been the greatest effort in the history of the MIAA. 

Actually I am pretty confident he would have been called out for it, by Calvin and non-Calvin fans alike. I certainly would have.

If a team is winning and goes for the steal and last-second layup, sure, but if their losing?  I think most people would just observe and forget.  I tend to agree with AHF on this one.  In Hope's 9-pt loss to Calvin, Bunn put in a last-second layup.  Granted it was not a steal--Hope already had the ball--but like HCG, we really shouldn't have a problem with a team wanting to play the full 40 minutes, even if the eventual winner could be considered a foregone conclusion.  If anyone should be called out for it in this example, maybe it should be Snikkers.  Take care of the ball.  But then, I wasn't at the game either.  Was he mugged?

[Adrian Hoops Fan]

I'm curious to know why--with 5 seconds left--Adrian thought it necessary to steal the ball from Tom Snikkers and score a layup at the final buzzer. Was the over/under for the game at 12?

I wasn't at the game so I don't know the full circumstances but in general I have no problem with a team, ahead or behind, playing the full 40 minutes.  I think it respects the opponent to play hard the entire game, and also instills the right mindset in the team, even if in certain situations it has no bearing on the outcome. 

It used to be played that way, but end-of-the-game etiquette has changed with advent of the shot clock. In today's game, once the shot clock is off and the outcome is decided, the winning team doesn't try to score and the losing team doesn't foul or play meaningful defense.

Really?? Now we are gonna start complaining that a team  played to the final buzzer.  Give me a break...if theat was Rodts, Mantel or any Kinight that would have been the greatest effort in the history of the MIAA. 

Actually I am pretty confident he would have been called out for it, by Calvin and non-Calvin fans alike. I certainly would have.

If a team is winning and goes for the steal and last-second layup, sure, but if their losing?  I think most people would just observe and forget.  I tend to agree with AHF on this one.  In Hope's 9-pt loss to Calvin, Bunn put in a last-second layup.  Granted it was not a steal--Hope already had the ball--but like HCG, we really shouldn't have a problem with a team wanting to play the full 40 minutes, even if the eventual winner could be considered a foregone conclusion.  If anyone should be called out for it in this example, maybe it should be Snikkers.  Take care of the ball.  But then, I wasn't at the game either.  Was he mugged?

No, just loose with his handles.  He knew the defender was tight on him and crossed over right in front of the defender.  Unfortunately, for Oldknight and Ziggy that doesn't matter because we should play nice and never steal the ball.  Maybe, Coach White should suspend or bench this player for such behavior.  Would that make it all better for you guys who contend its bad sportmanship and not hustle?

[KnightSlappy]

I'm curious to know why--with 5 seconds left--Adrian thought it necessary to steal the ball from Tom Snikkers and score a layup at the final buzzer. Was the over/under for the game at 12?

I wasn't at the game so I don't know the full circumstances but in general I have no problem with a team, ahead or behind, playing the full 40 minutes.  I think it respects the opponent to play hard the entire game, and also instills the right mindset in the team, even if in certain situations it has no bearing on the outcome. 

It used to be played that way, but end-of-the-game etiquette has changed with advent of the shot clock. In today's game, once the shot clock is off and the outcome is decided, the winning team doesn't try to score and the losing team doesn't foul or play meaningful defense.

Really?? Now we are gonna start complaining that a team  played to the final buzzer.  Give me a break...if theat was Rodts, Mantel or any Kinight that would have been the greatest effort in the history of the MIAA. 

Actually I am pretty confident he would have been called out for it, by Calvin and non-Calvin fans alike. I certainly would have.

If a team is winning and goes for the steal and last-second layup, sure, but if their losing?  I think most people would just observe and forget.  I tend to agree with AHF on this one.  In Hope's 9-pt loss to Calvin, Bunn put in a last-second layup.  Granted it was not a steal--Hope already had the ball--but like HCG, we really shouldn't have a problem with a team wanting to play the full 40 minutes, even if the eventual winner could be considered a foregone conclusion.  If anyone should be called out for it in this example, maybe it should be Snikkers.  Take care of the ball.  But then, I wasn't at the game either.  Was he mugged?

I wasn't there so I can't comment on the particular situation, but I'll offer my take.

It's really up to the team that's behind as to how the game will finish out. Should they decide to play defense, the leading team should feel free to run their offense (and even attempt a score). Should they decide to play off, the team that's ahead should let the clock run out.

I'll never fault a team that decides to play hard for 40 minutes.

[ziggy]

No, just loose with his handles.  He knew the defender was tight on him and crossed over right in front of the defender.  Unfortunately, for Oldknight and Ziggy that doesn't matter because we should play nice and never steal the ball.  Maybe, Coach White should suspend or bench this player for such behavior.  Would that make it all better for you guys who contend its bad sportmanship and not hustle?

If you can show me where I criticized the Adrian player I will gladly recant. I simply refuted the notion that the issue would have been interpreted differently if it had been a Calvin player.

If coach White was calling for the team to continue fouling to prolong the game then I see nothing wrong with the play. If the player took action of his own volition while the coach's desire was to run out the clock then I think there is merit in the discussion. Again, I am withholding judgment because I didn't see the play and I don't know what Coach White was calling for but the insinuation that different standards apply to Calvin players is ludicrous.

[realist]

The game is for 40 minutes.  In this case the Adrian player should be commended for not laying down, and Snikkers should learn to play until he hears a whistle or horn.  
I didn't have a problem with Bunn scoring at the end of that game either.

One of the problems is we get all these "play nice, don't score if you have a lead, pow can only be from a team that wins" politically correct ideas that have nothing to do with playing basketball.  If I were a coach I would want my team to play at 100% all the time.  If the team is fortunate enough to have a nice lead at the end I pull starters etc. to avoid rubbing it in.  I would never tell my 13th or 16th player not to be aggressive when he finally got alittle p.t. If the kid gets a chance to steal go for it.   Even better power slam it if you can do it

[Adrian Hoops Fan]

No, just loose with his handles.  He knew the defender was tight on him and crossed over right in front of the defender.  Unfortunately, for Oldknight and Ziggy that doesn't matter because we should play nice and never steal the ball.  Maybe, Coach White should suspend or bench this player for such behavior.  Would that make it all better for you guys who contend its bad sportmanship and not hustle?

If you can show me where I criticized the Adrian player I will gladly recant. I simply refuted the notion that the issue would have been interpreted differently if it had been a Calvin player.

If coach White was calling for the team to continue fouling to prolong the game then I see nothing wrong with the play. If the player took action of his own volition while the coach's desire was to run out the clock then I think there is merit in the discussion. Again, I am withholding judgment because I didn't see the play and I don't know what Coach White was calling for but the insinuation that different standards apply to Calvin players is ludicrous.

No, I would say very accurate.  YOu rarely hear credit come from MOST Calvin fans to the opponent or the calling out of their own for what other people may consider questionable. Adrian was out of foul mode but the press was still on. Like I say that insinuation doesn't fit all but MOST

[ChicagoHopeNut]

No, just loose with his handles.  He knew the defender was tight on him and crossed over right in front of the defender.  Unfortunately, for Oldknight and Ziggy that doesn't matter because we should play nice and never steal the ball.  Maybe, Coach White should suspend or bench this player for such behavior.  Would that make it all better for you guys who contend its bad sportmanship and not hustle?

If you can show me where I criticized the Adrian player I will gladly recant. I simply refuted the notion that the issue would have been interpreted differently if it had been a Calvin player.

If coach White was calling for the team to continue fouling to prolong the game then I see nothing wrong with the play. If the player took action of his own volition while the coach's desire was to run out the clock then I think there is merit in the discussion. Again, I am withholding judgment because I didn't see the play and I don't know what Coach White was calling for but the insinuation that different standards apply to Calvin players is ludicrous.

No, I would say very accurate.  YOu rarely hear credit come from MOST Calvin fans to the opponent or the calling out of their own for what other people may consider questionable. Adrian was out of foul mode but the press was still on. Like I say that insinuation doesn't fit all but MOST

In general, no fans of any team are going to spend lots of time giving credit to the opponent. I think the people on this board do a better job than normal of giving credit to their opponents and the rest of the league in general.  But as a fan of team X people are going to always focus on the positive of team X (as well as the negatives like no rebounding, bad defense, etc.) before they spend lots of time worrying about the other team.

[Erm Schmigget]

No, just loose with his handles.  He knew the defender was tight on him and crossed over right in front of the defender.  Unfortunately, for Oldknight and Ziggy that doesn't matter because we should play nice and never steal the ball.  Maybe, Coach White should suspend or bench this player for such behavior.  Would that make it all better for you guys who contend its bad sportmanship and not hustle?

If you can show me where I criticized the Adrian player I will gladly recant. I simply refuted the notion that the issue would have been interpreted differently if it had been a Calvin player.

If coach White was calling for the team to continue fouling to prolong the game then I see nothing wrong with the play. If the player took action of his own volition while the coach's desire was to run out the clock then I think there is merit in the discussion. Again, I am withholding judgment because I didn't see the play and I don't know what Coach White was calling for but the insinuation that different standards apply to Calvin players is ludicrous.

No, I would say very accurate.  YOu rarely hear credit come from MOST Calvin fans to the opponent or the calling out of their own for what other people may consider questionable. Adrian was out of foul mode but the press was still on. Like I say that insinuation doesn't fit all but MOST

In general, no fans of any team are going to spend lots of time giving credit to the opponent. I think the people on this board do a better job than normal of giving credit to their opponents and the rest of the league in general.  But as a fan of team X people going to always focus on the positive of team X (as well as the negatives like no rebounding, bad defense, etc.) before they spend lots of time worrying about the other team.

This is why people like AHF and I might wonder why a fan of the winning team felt the need to gripe about the play in question.  I think most of us would just move on and remember the game as an 11-pt win, and call that good enough.